Photo BMW v8 2006

All that has to do with the power train, gearbox, clutch, fuels and lubricants, etc. Generally the mechanical side of Formula One.
User avatar
CCRomeo
0
Joined: 16 Jan 2006, 16:41
Location: Conn. USA

Photo BMW v8 2006

Post

Image
Last edited by CCRomeo on 17 Jan 2006, 15:12, edited 1 time in total.
Image

manchild
manchild
12
Joined: 03 Jun 2005, 10:54

Post

CCRomeo,

Pic from above IS new BMW V8 F1 engine while the one you posted below is over two decades old BMW F1 4 cyl. TURBO engine.

:roll:
Last edited by manchild on 17 Jan 2006, 15:13, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
CCRomeo
0
Joined: 16 Jan 2006, 16:41
Location: Conn. USA

Post

sorry about that caption wrong will correct
Image

User avatar
jgredline
0
Joined: 16 Jan 2006, 07:07
Location: Los Angeles

Post

Old or new, they are incredible
To finish first, first you must finish.

West
West
0
Joined: 07 Jan 2004, 00:42
Location: San Diego, CA

Post

Doesn't their V8 weigh as much as their V10? This year's engine weighs 95kg and i think the V10 was near 92kg at one point.
Bring back wider rear wings, V10s, and tobacco advertisements

User avatar
Spencifer_Murphy
0
Joined: 11 Apr 2004, 23:29
Location: London, England, UK

Post

http://www.f1technical.net/news/1580

The engine weighs 95KGs because there is now a rule that stipulates that the engine must have a minimum weight of 95KGs.

If anything this may help Mclaren iron out those reliability problems...make a heavier engine less likely to break...i guess lol
Silence is golden when you don't know a good answer.

ginsu
ginsu
0
Joined: 17 Jan 2006, 02:23

Post

Minimum engine weight? That completely stifles engine development. Maybe it's a cost cutting measure too.
I love to love Senna.

Guest
Guest
0

Post

yeah but im pretty sure they can put ballast at the bottom. it doesnt jepordise the actual engine weight, as they can have the ballast where its better and lower the cfg

dumrick
dumrick
0
Joined: 19 Jan 2004, 13:36
Location: Portugal

Post

That's not all the story. :?

In terms of CFG HEIGHT, that's true, but it forces it backwards, and we know how much teams have done these few years to increase the weight on the nose to move the CFG FORWARD.

User avatar
Spencifer_Murphy
0
Joined: 11 Apr 2004, 23:29
Location: London, England, UK

Post

I think it may be mostly a cost-cutting measure, but the CofG factor is also a key piont.
Silence is golden when you don't know a good answer.